[Pkg-ime-devel] Bug#782453: Bug#782453: Bug#782453: ibus-cangjie: Many UX issues fixed upstream
- Subject: [Pkg-ime-devel] Bug#782453: Bug#782453: Bug#782453: ibus-cangjie: Many UX issues fixed upstream
- From: osamu@debian.org (Osamu Aoki)
- Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 01:26:02 +0900
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20150509162602.GA6234@goofy.local>
- In-reply-to: <1430308788.9245.28.camel@fedoraproject.org>
- References: <20150412105127.2807.69322.reportbug@jessie> <1429191122.2641.1.camel@fedoraproject.org> <1430302135.9245.21.camel@fedoraproject.org> <20150429114346.GA11169@gmail.com> <1430308788.9245.28.camel@fedoraproject.org>
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 01:59:48PM +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 19:43 +0800, ChangZhuo Chen wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:08:55PM +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> > > So 8.0 is out now, can we get that into 8.1?
> >
> > Is backport good enough for this issue?
>
> Issue**s** ;)
>
> I'm not sure if Debian users tend to use backports.
It is "default=enabled" for the fresh new jessie install.
(This was a surprize last minutes change of jessie)
> If it's well
> documented, and there's an expectation that users should look into
Maybe ...
> backports, then sure. (and realistically, it's better to have it fixed
> in backports than not at all ;) )
Yes.
If patch is clean focused one, push to jerssie itself may be good idea.
But usually, pushing to backport takes less efforts for the maintainer
and release manager.
Osamu
Reply to: